Roland Barthes was born in 1915. In his time he was a French literary theorist, philosopher and critic. He influenced the development of schools of theory, including structuralism, semiotics, existentialism, social theory, Marxism, and post-structuralism. He died in 1980.
His book: ‘Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography’ is described as being a graceful, contemplative volume that was published in 1979. Commenting on artists such as Avedon, Clifford, Mapplethorpe, and Nadar, Roland Barthes presents photography as being outside the codes of language or culture, acting on the body as much as on the mind, and rendering death and loss more acutely than any other medium.
‘Examining the themes of presence and absence, the relationship between photography and theatre, history and death, these 'reflections on photography' begin as an investigation into the nature of photographs. Then, as Barthes contemplates a photograph of his mother as a child, the book becomes an exposition of his own mind.’ http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Camera_Lucida.html?id=vHnIQgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y
In the book ‘Basic Critical Theory for Photographers’ which has a section analysing Roland Barthes’ book ‘Camera Lucida’ in parts goes into more detail.
It states that Roland Barthes had been fascinated by photography in opposition to the cinema and was overcome by a desire to understand what the ‘essential feature’ was that separated photography from other images.
His point of view on the matter was that the photograph mechanically makes infinite something that only occurred once and couldn’t be repeated. Also unlike other images, the photograph always seems to point to or show something- it is ‘...a weightless transparent envelope’ consequently making it impossible to distinguish it from what it represents.
‘The photograph as signifier is inextricably bound with its referent.’ The subject is always shown in a photograph and there’s no mark other than the show of persistence of the referent making it difficult to understand photography. And a person would try different ways of understanding it such as looking at the photos historical or sociological surroundings. Roland Barthes realised neither group, explains the book. [‘...discussed precisely the photographs which interest me, which give me pleasure or emotion...I saw only the referent, the desired object, the beloved body...’ Dismissing sociological commentary, he wanted to be ‘...a primitive, without culture’.]
[‘Prior to photography, portraits generally showed a person’s social status or wealth. Photography has changed the way we look at ourselves, but there is no history of looking.’] I find that this links with what John Berger was saying in ‘Ways of Seeing’ about how historic painted portrait did suggest that person’s social status and wealth judging by clothing and what was positioned into the painting. Photography has a huge impact in how we see things around us.